By examining existing definitions and data sets, this article explores the current state of efforts intended to measure corporate reputation. Both definitions and data are found to be lacking, and it is argued that many deficiencies in definition and data can be attributed to the fact that theory development related to corporate reputation has been insufficient.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alsop, R.
(2001, February 7). Harris interactive survey indicates fragility of corporate reputations. Wall Street Journal, p. 1-1.
2.
Badenhausen, K.
(1998). Quantifying brand values. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(1 and 2), 48-51.
3.
Baucus, M.
(1995). Commentary: Halo-adjusted residuals—Prolonging the life of a terminally ill measure of corporate social performance. Business& Society, 34(2), 227-235.
4.
Black, E. L.
, Carnes, T. A., & Richardson, V. J. (2000). The market valuation of corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(1), 31-42.
5.
Bromley, D. B.
(2000). Psychological aspects of corporate identity, image and reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(2), 240-252.
6.
Brown, B.
, & Logsdon, J. M. (1997). Factors influencing Fortune’s corporate reputation for “community and environmental responsibility.” In J. Weber & K. Rehbein (Eds.), IABS proceedings (Eighth annual conference, pp. 184-189). Destin, FL: International Association for Business and Society.
7.
Brown, B.
,& Logsdon, J. M. (1999). Corporate reputation and organization identity as constructs for business and society research. In D. J. Wood & D. Windsor (Eds.), IABS proceedings (Tenth annual conference, pp. 168-173). Paris: International Association for Business and Society.
8.
Brown, B.
, & Perry, S. (1994). Removing the financial performance halo from Fortune’s “most admired companies.”Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1346-1359.
9.
Brown, B.
,& Perry, S. (1995a). Focal paper: Halo-removed residuals of Fortune’s “ responsibility to the community and environment”—A decade of data. Business& Society, 34(2), 199-215.
10.
Brown, B.
, & Perry, S. (1995b). Some additional thoughts on halo-removed Fortune residuals. Business & Society, 34(2), 236-240.
11.
Caruana, A.
,& Chircop, S. (2000). Measuring corporate reputation: Acase example. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(1), 43-57.
12.
Caudron, S.
(1997, February 3). Forget your image: It’s your reputation that matters. Industry Week, pp. 13-16.
13.
Davies, G.
, Chun, R., da Silva, R. V., & Roper, S. (2001). The personification metaphor as a measurement approach for corporate performance. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(1), 113-127.
14.
Fombrun, C. J.
(1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
15.
Fombrun, C. J.
(1998). Indices of corporate reputation: An analysis of media rankings and social monitors. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(4), 327-340.
16.
Fombrun, C. J.
,& Gardberg, N. (2000). Who’s tops in corporate reputation?Corporate Reputation Review, 3(1), 13-17.
17.
Fombrun, C. J.
,& Rindova, V. (1994). Reputational rankings: Institutionalizing social audits of corporate performance. In S. Wartick & D. Collins (Eds.), IABS proceedings (Fifth annual conference, pp. 216-221). Hilton Head, SC: International Association for Business and Society.
18.
Fombrun, C. J.
,& Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258.
19.
Gaines-Ross, L.
(1998). Leveraging corporate equity. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(1 and 2), 51-56.
20.
Gregory, J. R.
(1998). ROI: Calculating advertising’s impact on stock price. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(1 and 2), 56-60.
21.
Jones, G. H.
, Jones, B. H.,& Little, P. (2000). Reputation as reservoir: Buffering against loss in times of economic crisis. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(1), 21-29.
22.
Keisler, S.
, & Sproul, L. (1982). Managerial response to changing environments: Perspectives on problem sensing from social cognition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 548-570.
23.
Kerlinger, F. N.
(1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
24.
Logsdon, J. M.
,& Wartick, S. L. (1995). Commentary: Theoretically based applications and implications for using the Brown and Perry database. Business & Society, 34(2), 222-226.
25.
Mitchell, R. K.
, Agle, B., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853-886.
26.
Riahi-Belkaoui, A.
(2001). The role of corporate reputation for multinational firms: Accounting, organizational, and market considerations. Westport, CT: Quorum.
27.
Schultz, M.
, Mouritsen, J.,& Gabrielsen, G. (2001). Sticky reputation: Analyzing a ranking system. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(1), 24-41.
28.
Shenkar, O.
, & Yuchtman-Yaar, E. (1997). Reputation, image, prestige, and goodwill: An interdisciplinary approach to organizational standing. Human Relations, 50(11), 1361-1381.
29.
Szwajkowski, E.
, & Figelwicz, R. E. (1997). Of babies and bathwater: An extension of the Business& Society research forum on the Fortune reputation database. Business& Society, 36(4), 362-386.
30.
van Riel, C. B.
, Stroeker, N. E., & Maathuis, O.J.M. (1998). Measuring corporate images. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(4), 313-326.
31.
Wartick, S. L.
(1992). The relationship between intense media exposure and change in corporate reputation. Business & Society, 31, 33-42.
32.
Wartick, S. L.
(2000). The problem of inter-rater group differences in the Fortune “most admired companies” survey: An empirical look using financial performance measures. In K. A. Getz & D. Windsor (Eds.), IABS proceedings (Eleventh annual conference, pp. 59-64). Burlington, VT: International Association for Business and Society.
33.
Williams, R. J.
, & Barrett, J. D. (2000). Corporate philanthropy, criminal activity, and firm reputation: Is there a link?Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 341-350.
34.
Wood, D. J.
(Ed.). (1995). Introduction: The Fortune database as a CSP measure. Business& Society, 34(2), 197-198.
35.
Zyglidopoulos, S. C.
(2001). The impact of accidents on firms’ reputation for social performance. Business & Society, 40(4), 416-441.
